About your Search

20121113
20121113
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
was it, 1982 or 1983, back in the 1980's, tip o'neill and ronald reagan got together and made adjustments to social security that saved the program. that's my point. sometimes you need to adjust and change to save the very thing you care most about. and so tip o'neill didn't sell out the democratic party by embracing that agreement. the democrats in congress, many of them very progressive at that time who supported it, didn't work traders to the party. if we do it in a responsible way, a balanced and doesn't just gut the programs and just not all entitlement reform with no revenue, i think the base of the party and leaders and organized labor will understand. they also know the alternative is doing nothing, with bad damage to jobs and the economy. and ultimately insolvency of these programs themselves, or. b, the right wing of the republicans are coming in and taking over because we have done nothing to solve the problem and their answer to the solution would be much more draconian. host: jack. he's our first phone call for the senator. republican. go ahead. caller: mr. bayh, one question
income tax? [talking over each other] a big part of it was ronald reagan's in the reform act of 1886 that, you know, increased reductions and what have you. when i got out of school, probably before both of you were born, it was in the middle 20s. and the direction we are going, guys, it will be in the mid- 50s. in the argument of so-called fairness, we are telling, you know, the top few% that pay 43% of all taxes, it is only fair you pay more. i hope it will be a very welcome outcome. connell: largely, i am sure, it is 2% versus 98% when you pull it. it is very popular, the idea of raising taxes on the rich. they favor extending the bush tax cuts except for the wealthy. neil: you assume that the rich guy pay for it. what i would not do at that table, i would not -- about the appetizer. then, what happens is we penalize those who provide -- believe me, i am not one of these, by the way, nothing wrong with that. i just think it is a disjointed argument. one thing romney did get right, although he maybe did not articulate as well as he should have, it is about everyone having a stake in the
is the payback from party leaders? guest: there is change and then there is change. tip o'neill and ronald reagan got together and saved the program. sometimes you need to adjust to change the thing you care most about. tip o'neill did not sell off the democratic party by embracing that. if we do it in a responsible way that doesn't gut the program, i think the base of the party will understand. the alternative is doing nothing with bad damage to the economy, or the right wing of the republicans coming in and taking over and their answer to the solution would be much more draconian. host: jack in kentucky. caller: i have one question. can you guarantee -- guest: i thought you're going to ask why indiana university and kentucky and not playing basketball this year. for the first time they are now playing and we are rivals. i cannot talk about classified information on tv. things like stinger missiles are very problematic and we do everything we can to keep track of them. muammar gaddafi stockpiles of weapons, surface- to-air missiles and we're doing everything to track those down and secure them.
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3